Why James White is wrong

James White was invited as speaker at a Baptist Church in Cape Town, South Africa recently. The place was packed with people who came to listen to this popular speaker. I was there and prepared 5 questions for him. It was then announced that questions will not, as is the norm elsewhere, be taken from the floor, but we must TEXT (SMS) our questions to a mobile number during the last worship song before White took the floor! This means the audience had a few minutes only to text per mobile, whilst we were supposed to be worshiping. How does one text a long, perhaps complicated question in a few minutes with people singing next to you? Never mind the fact that I had five questions for him. The moderator who received the questions was of course a White supporter and could thus easily censor questions they did not like . Needless to say none of my questions were asked.

White is a dynamic speaker and promoter of Modern Bible Versions. His teachings are extremely popular and often well-received because it gives an air of validity to the many modern Bible versions that are out there; however, we know that the popular message is not always the correct one. Reality is also that White is a champion of creating confusion and many lies he told can be identified. One author, Peter Ruckman, identified 79 times White lied in his “KJO Controversy” book. Let’s just mention two: (1) White lied about Hort’s scholarship, by omission (2) He lied about the quality of the Vaticanus, by refusing to discuss it (Ruckman, P- “The scholarship only controversy, pp.374-5) etc.

No wonder some call him a “professional lier” But we are not here to resort to name-calling, we must look at the facts, which speak for themselves. And the Word instructs us that “by their fruits ye shall know them”.

White teaches that the King James Bible is not the Words of God in the English language. Although he SAYS he has nothing against the KJB itself, only against the KJO Movement, from his book “The King James Only controversy- can you trust modern translations” it becomes clear that this is a lie. This book is full of vitriol attacks on the KJB itself. Mr White would have had more credibility if at least he was honest in this regard.

White and those who do NOT believe there is ONE Bible which indeed is God’s Words (which is the majority of preachers and Bible lecturers nowadays) have three major problems:

A) If there is no specific Bible that IS God’s Word there is no final written authority. Theoretically one could discover more papyri tomorrow, they say, which could contradict what we believe today. QUESTION= THEN HOW CAN GOD HOLD US ACCOUNTABLE IF WE ARE UNSURE ABOUT WHAT HE SAYS? White followers often ask “but what about those who do not speak English?” They forget that the KJB has been translated into more than 2,500 languages! Another favourite White question is “where was God’s Words prior to the writing of the KJB?” Let’s counter that with another question- “where was God’s Word, according to you James White, prior to 1881 when Westcott and Hort laid the foundation of the modern versions?” The answer of course is that God’s Words were there all along in the Antiochian text-type. In ENGLISH it peaked in the KJV- the Bible of the Reformation and that sparked wonderful revivals all over the globe.

B) White and his camp almost completely ignore or belittle Satan’s work of deceiving mankind. The Word has more than 100 warnings regarding man lying or Satan deceiving. Not one of them are in White’s book. White and his camp also completely ignore or avoid evidence from the New Age camp that they (the New Age Movement), need to CHANGE the Bible so that eventually it would be a “holy” book acceptable to all religions i.e. syncretism. They ignore the fact that the first and second sins every committed on earth were the serpent (Satan) OMITTING from what God said and then ADDING to what God said (Gen 3:1,4) In fact they ignore or belittle the fact that mankind can be deceived!

C) Few would disagree that we live in times of great apostasy (definition= “falling away from the truth”). QUESTION= Is it logical to think that God would give us better and better Bibles as apostasy increases? I think not!

The website www.tulipgems.com/whichbible5.htm rebuts James White’s views on the issue of which Bible is God’s Words, and I am mentioning the most relevant rebuttals here (with some of my own comments added). Here are TEN ARGUMENTS:

1) White uses Circular Reasoning. He begins with the conclusion of his argument that we can trust the Modern Bible Versions, and then uses his conclusion in the course of his arguments. Hypocritically he accuses KJO scholars of Circular Reasoning. Fact is, as Christians we need to exercise faith in God and His Word; so circular reasoning in itself is not a bad thing, but sometimes necessary.

2) White accuses KJO believers of name-calling and slanderous attacks on the Internet. Yet White does this himself when he makes sweeping allegations against the KJO movement and its followers. Fact is, if a statement is true or sincerely believed to be true and in the public interest, it is NOT slander. Didn’t Jesus call Herod “a fox” in Luke 13:32? And Jesus didn’t mean a soft, cuddly animal. He meant a sly, deceitful man Herod.

3) White makes the startling statement that Ps 12:6-7 (“6 The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.”) does NOT refer to preservation of God’s Words. Are we to believe that God has INSPIRED His word but not preserved it? That God has not promised to preserve it from generation to generation? This deduction is illogical. So to circumvent this obvious problem White SAYS God preserved it- but he does not mean it in the way KJV believers believe it. He says God preserved it through the many different modern translations, so to avoid that one person or group gets a “monopoly” on God’s Word. The problem with this however is – how can this be possible if the Modern Versions themselves do not agree with each other? Would God really follow such a confusing approach? It is illogical (again) to say that we must compile God’s words like a puzzle using bits of one translation and pieces from another and put it all together. Who them is the final arbitrator to tell us what the correct final product is? Must it be Mr White? Does he then become my guru to tell me what God’s words are? And doesn’t this open up the possibility of ANYTHING added as “God’s words”? White himself admits that the multiple new modern versions coming out all the time (on average a new “Bible” every 3 days!) are unnecessary. Then where does he draw the line? Which Bibles are OK and which are not? Doesn’t this situation bring complication and doubt? Didn’t Jesus say the gospel is so plain and simple that even a child will understand it?

4) White likes to call KJO followers believers in “conspiracies“. He says there is no conspiracy to corrupt God’s Word. Then what about Gen 3:1-5 where Satan’s first contact with mankind was to question, misquote and contradict God’s Words? If you were the devil wouldn’t you want to change God’s Word? Topping this White is again not honest in that he has some conspiracy theories of his own, e.g. he defends the Nicea Council as if it wasn’t really Roman Catholic.It takes a minute of looking at the Canons of the Council of Nicea to see they are the foundation of the Roman Catholic church. According to White, the DEITY of Christ (which is the main doctrine at stake in the KJO vs Modern Versions debate), was not truly defended until the Council of Nicea, as if Paul, Peter, John, Polycarp etc. never defended the Trinity prior to this Council. According to White’s Conspiracy Theory it took a GOVERNMENT SPONSORED Council to tell the church the real truth about Christ’s deity.

5) White seems to defend the characters of Westcott and Hort. He must do this if he promotes the modern versions, since these two men form the basis for both the ever evolving Nestle-Aland text and the UBS text. Truth is, thse two men were indeed involved in occultic activities. This can be gleaned by reading their biographies. They were INVOLVED in Worshiping of Mary, calling up the dead in seances, speaking with devils etc. The Bible forbids all three these activities. WESTCOTT did not accept Gen 1-3 (a literal 6 day creation), nor the bodily resurrection of Jesus. Westcott’s close friend Madame Helena Blavatsky was the founder of the Theosophical Society, which became the forerunner of today’s New Age Movement. HORT did not believe in the infallibility of Scripture, nor in creation (He favored Darwin’s Evolution). Both WESTCOTT and HORT rejected the vicarious atonement (that Jesus bore the penalty of our sins), and they rejected eternal punishment. They had a close friend Philip Schaff who was on the board of the American Standard Version of the Bible. Philip Schaff advocated a One-Word-Religion (one of the key goals of the New Age Movement).

6) White’s book “The KJO Controversy” is endorsed on the front cover by Norman Geisler. This is interesting since Geisler endorses the Roman Catholic church. Is a remarkable coincidence since Geisler sees no problem with at least eleven unbiblical doctrines and practices of the Catholic church. Examples include salvation by works, and transubstantiation. NO wonder that some accuse White of being an “undercover” Jesuit in the Protestant church- secretly promoting the agenda of the Vatican! White argues that this cannot be true since he often debates with and opposes Catholic doctrine in public. However, could one argue that this is a smokescreen? What is known is that it is part of the Jesuit agenda to infiltrate Evangelical churches, it is furthermore part of the Jesuit oaths to deceive and lie where necessary, thus it is not an altogether impossibility. And no, this is not a conspiracy theory, it is a logical conclusion. Since the assassination attempt by Roman Catholic Guy Fawkes, directed by Jesuit priest Henry Garnet (this is History), on King James 1 in 1605, it has become clear that the Roman Catholic Church has every reason to attack the KJB and to promote modern versions. The presence of Roman Catholic Cardinal Carlo M.Martini as one of the drivers of the current United Bible Society’s Greek New testament makes this clearer.

7) White denies that a translator’s personal beliefs and immoral conduct affects his or her work in translating the Bible. He firstly argues that King James might have been a homosexual, but this did not make the KJV soft on homosexuality. Fact is there is NO evidence that King James was ever a homosexual, or even that he was soft on the issue. To the contrary- see http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Bible/king_james-unjustly_accused.htm It was a false rumor that was started by someone 25 years after King James’ death. On the other hand we have Dr Virginia Molenkott, who admitted “my lesbianism has always been a part of me”. Dr Molenkott was a language expert to the NIV translation committee who could change any part of Scripture where she believed the language was wrong. She can be compared to an expert witness in court- even not being the plaintiff or defendant, nor eyewitness, the expert witness can often sway the case due to his/her expert knowledge. Then there was the homosexual Dr Martin Woudtsra, who WAS on the NIV committee itself-in fact he was the chairman of the committee and head of Old Testament translation. See http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Bible/niv_sodomite_on_committee.htm

8) White promotes the Alexandrian text-type as representing an earlier, and hence more accurate form of text type that originates from Antioch (The Traditional text line). Fact is it has now been confirmed that the Alexandrian is NOT better (See https://youtu.be/k0PR-dSxPa4?list=PLhmAbEGx-AnRnnY4pE6kwj1XYsqUeH0gY), and is NOT earlier. (See https://youtu.be/WaNx1HTA4Tw). To the consternation of modern version supporters who always said the KJB is based on newer (thus less reliable) sources, ancient papyri now supports the Traditional text, proving that the Textus Receptus (on which the KJB is based) is at least as old as the Alexandrian sources. There are 5700 Manuscripts and 79 papyri found that support the Traditional (pro-KJB) route. On the other hand there are ONLY 44 (some say 45) Manuscripts and about 9 papyri (p20,p23,p45,p46,p47,p50,p52,p66,p75) that support the Alexandrian route (Modern Versions). On top of this these Alexandrian sources are inconsistent. Although White denies this, fact is not two of these are the same or closely similar. The opposite is true for the Traditional Route- where ALL 5700 sources are consistent. When the KJB was written in English it only needed to use about 6 sources since it all agreed 100% with the 5700+ sources (which are now from the recent papyri discoveries confirmed as as at least as old as the Alexandrian ones). On top of this the Sinaiticus, and Vaticanus, which are the two MAIN SOURCES of the Alexandrian route and which started the modern translation explosion, have now been exposed as COUNTERFEITS- most probably Roman Catholic inventions in the 1800’s. NOT +- 300AD as always argued (including White in his book “The KJO Controversy”; also Norman Geisler and many others that hailed the fake Sinaiticus for example as “the most important witness to the text because of its’ antiquity, accuracy and lack of omissions” White said the Sinaticus is “neither demonic nor infallible. It is a great treasure, for a while the oldest manuscript known, and for all time a tremendously valuable asset to our knowledge of the NT text”. PHONY documents! So much for a “great treasure”! All the modern Bible versions are based on fakes! White argues that this is no longer relevant since the discovery of the papyri. But their are only about 9 that support this route, and none are consistent with each other!

9) White says he believes in an eclectic approach i.e. deriving ideas from a diverse selection of sources. Does this mean all Christians must go an study hundred of Bible versions, plus Greek, Hebrew and Latin to identify what the Bible really says? Didn’t Jesus say “thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes.” ? (Matt 11:25). White cannot answer the question whether a final, written authority exists. If he says “yes” he must show us where it is, since he denies that it is the KJV in English. If he says “no”, then how can God hold us accountable to scriptures that we are not sure of?

10) White argues that it is impossible to say that someone was purposefully trying to “hide” or “change” anything in the modern translations. But what we DO know is that Satan is too smart to change everything in the Bible. He won’t make a green dollar-note orange when he creates a counterfeit- no, it will be as close to the original as possible! Thus we find that in SOME places in modern versions the deity of Christ gets affirmed, but in others in gets denied. Origen of Alexandria who had great influence on the intellectuals of his time, and who promoted Gnosticism and Greek philosophy, denied Christ’s deity in his writings. The KJB (which comes from the Traditional text route) and the Modern Versions (who all come from the Alexandrian route) cannot both be correct. If White is correct then the Traditional Route has 5700 manuscripts plus 79 papyri that ALL ADDED THE SAME scriptures. That must be the greatest coincidence ever. Fact is this is impossible.

Logic tells us one route must be CORRUPT. If it is not the Traditional (KJO) Route then it must be the Alexandrian route. This means the modern versions indeed DELETED hundreds of verses and words- directly against God’s instructions not to do so.

The Modern Versions are
1) based primarily on COUNTERFEIT manuscripts called the Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, this not the “best” nor the “oldest”. They have now been exposed as counterfeits from a much later age than originally thought
2) confirmed by 9 or so papyri which are all inconsistent with each other
3) underwritten by Westcott and Hort who were occultists and clearly not godly men
4) written or edited in modern times sometimes by homosexuals
5) supported by people like Norman Geisler who clearly promote a Roman Catholic agenda.

White tries hard in his book “The KJO Controversy” to leave the impression that it is the KJO route that is corrupt, but in the end if we look OBJECTIVELY AT ALL THE EVIDENCE, it is very clear which route is really corrupt.